This is a new cornerhorn design!

[bushhorns]

The advantage of a Cornerhorn is well known (Klipschhorn) I wanted to downsize
the Cabinet . I used a combination Bush and Klipsch horndesign to achieve the
best possible output. I used the Dayton Audio PS180-8 and the a Fostex 166en
and the sound was pleasing.

The Cabinet is not an easy build some 50 some odd pieces but where there is a
will there's a way, right? The Img. below shows the accustic operation.


I call it the Klaushorn, why not!
Any thoughts?

[bushhorns]

The back of the driver radiates from the 12 sq.in to the port of 512 sq.in. With the default design, where the port size would be 8"wide*2sides*32"high=512. This makes the cabinet a very compact back loaded corner Horn. However lets not forget that by placing the cabinet in the corner the size decreases, apose to the free air placement size would be 8 times bigger. We can only point out all gains and losses, the final choice you need to make for your Application of the Klaushorn, and if needed we can help to make this decision.

[doubtingthomas]

Well done!

[bentoronto]

Looks very handsome.

Klipsch was very attached to the notion of having a smallish sealed box behind of the driver (and a small aperture for the front). But the only way to have a sealed box and be full-range is to have all the notes, bottom to top, come around through the folded horn.

Perhaps those who favor full-range design AND horns, should think about getting the treble out through a folded horn.

For the moment, I can't think why the whole audio design world dismisses the idea of sending the treble through a folded horn??? Might need a little EQ. It should have the same charms as sending the bass out into the room that way. Doesn't seem esp. problematic?

Ben

[Scottmoose]

Klipsch was very attached to the notion of having a smallish sealed box behind of the driver (and a small aperture for the front).

Those are called front loaded [bass] horns.

For the moment, I can't think why the whole audio design world dismisses the idea of sending the treble through a folded horn??? Might need a little EQ. It should have the same charms as sending the bass out into the room that way. Doesn't seem esp. problematic?

Ha! Not especially problematic? I wish. 99% of speaker designers for the past 8 decades have wished the same too.

Why not use a folded bass horn full-range? Simple: the folding causes significant attenuation of mids & HF, along with severe phase &c. issues from internal reflections. The LF wavelengths aren't especially bothered about this, since they're too long to be significantly disturbed. Some people, like myself, actually design the folding scheme to be a functional part of the low-pass filter in back-horn designs (you really don't want mids / HF coming through the horn in those ). These problems are basically too severe to be overcome, even today, with digital Eq etc. No free lunches in audio I'm afraid.

The Karlson boxes sort-of follow this criteria, but they're rmore 4 - 8 order BP than horns per se. Related, but not quite the same. Dredging though what's left of my mind for examples in audio history, I suspect the closest approach was the original Lowther-Voigt corner horn, which used a back-loaded bass horn, while the front fired into reflectors which dispersed the mids & HF into the room. This indirect radiation of the upper registers was primarily a means of dealing with the significant peaking of the early Lowther drive units. Voigt had a handful of other types too in his patents; none would have offered all that distinguished a mid & HF performance though. There may be some other examples from WE etc., although I can't recall any off the top of my head.

[bentoronto]

All right, no argument from me, and that's conventional wisdom (I'm not using "conventional" in its usual pejorative sense). For sure, lowpass feature may have helped keep noise out of bass horn output in front loaded horns.

Of course until recently, it was conventionally accepted that no OB would produce useful bass below 100 Hz, once you did the wave arithmetic.

But my agreement does not extend to the inexorable logic of comb filters and other phase effects that are perfectly damaging in theory but not in hearing.

I'd like to see somebody put a mid-to-treble driver deep in a folded horn and see what comes out. Who knows, on music, might be luscious spacious sound.

Ben

[Scottmoose]

Of course until recently, it was conventionally accepted that no OB would produce useful bass below 100 Hz, once you did the wave arithmetic.

Really? That's news to me, and it would have been news to Peter Walker and quite a few other people from the pioneers of audio onward.

But my agreement does not extend to the inexorable logic of comb filters and other phase effects that are perfectly damaging in theory but not in hearing.

No? Fair enough; I advise you listen to a back-horn with too high an acoustic XO. You'll very rapidly find out why it's not a great idea. Or a folded front [bass] horn with wideband drive unit.

I'd like to see somebody put a mid-to-treble driver deep in a folded horn and see what comes out. Who knows, on music, might be luscious spacious sound.

As I say, they have, and I assure you, it isn't.

[bentoronto]

It would be a simple matter for somebody to feed a test signal say, 20-10k Hz into their horn driver and see what comes out into the room. Esp, if they could compare it to the same driver playing directly.

I'd do it with my Klipschorn except it is rather buried (acoustically speaking) behind a lot of stuff that would impair the treble but not the bass. Not to mention the bass-only driver in there and other reasons too.

While nobody would expect anything much at 10kHz coming out of an ordinary unpainted folded horn with sharp bends, there might be usable and pleasant output at 1kHz. Dunno.

Klipsch used a 400 Hz, 12dB/8ave crossover, if I am not mistaken. I use roughly 110 Hz and 24dB/8ave (and I have to disclose here that I don't care for the sound of horns as treble speakers, Klipsch included).

Ben

[bushhorns]

Basic High-frequencies are Directional you cant bent them around a corner, just stand beside the speaker and hear the difference from standing in front. Even the Bass does not really like the bending of to many Corners. But we really only talking about 2 oct. (30-60hz and 60-120hz) Scottmoose said it more elloquently then, I guess it is my German back ground.

I have purchased Mr. Martins BLH work sheet but I get stuck when I try to discribe the actual horn dimention. However I'm still young (62) i'll give it another shot one day!

[chrisb]

Originally Posted by bentoronto

It would be a simple matter for somebody to feed a test signal say, 20-10k Hz into their horn driver and see what comes out into the room. Esp, if they could compare it to the same driver playing directly.

I'd do it with my Klipschorn except it is rather buried (acoustically speaking) behind a lot of stuff that would impair the treble but not the bass. Not to mention the bass-only driver in there and other reasons too.

While nobody would expect anything much at 10kHz coming out of an ordinary unpainted folded horn with sharp bends, there might be usable and pleasant output at 1kHz. Dunno.

Klipsch used a 400 Hz, 12dB/8ave crossover, if I am not mistaken. I use roughly 110 Hz and 24dB/8ave (and I have to disclose here that I don't care for the sound of horns as treble speakers, Klipsch included).

Ben

no doubt you'd perceive some acoustic output, but how close this would resemble "pleasant" or even discernible as music with complex waveforms is the question - my money's on "not very"